/Downloads.java).
In other words we should now be aligned on the standard asf procedure.
Romain Manni-Bucau
@rmannibucau <https://twitter.com/rmannibucau> | Blog
<https://rmannibucau.metawerx.net/> | Old Blog
<http://rmannibucau.wordpress.com> | Github <https://github.com/rm
to ensure it passes. Even you Mark never run
-Pall-adapters which means you have ~1/3 of the actual coverage for several
modules. We did a fastbuild profile to solve that local build time issue a
long time ago. Maybe just invest in making it better?
>
> LieGrue,
> strub
>
>
> >
t.
> Even better: we can have an EE6 samples which we can test against new and
> old containers.
> Plus an EE7 examples and EE8 examples project which can run against newer
> containers.
>
We align our examples on the branch so not a big advantage from my window.
>
> But w
Hi Mark,
think we already discuss it somewhere else but wrote again the points
inline if it has been missed
Romain Manni-Bucau
@rmannibucau <https://twitter.com/rmannibucau> | Blog
<https://rmannibucau.metawerx.net/> | Old Blog
<http://rmannibucau.wordpress.com> | Github &
and 2. arquillian modules for "integration tests" (understand run in
a real tomee)
Romain Manni-Bucau
@rmannibucau <https://twitter.com/rmannibucau> | Blog
<https://rmannibucau.metawerx.net/> | Old Blog
<http://rmannibucau.wordpress.com> | Github <https://github.com/rma
Hmm, bval and cdi tck right? This is almost nothing of ee tck coverage
sadly.
Le jeu. 21 juin 2018 08:22, Gurkan Erdogdu a écrit :
> Aha 3 h is ok, assumed 13 h :) Actually I was running the TCK in my laptop
> less than 3h
>
> On Thu, Jun 21, 2018 at 9:20 AM, Romain Manni-Buca
the full infra. So if you want to check some
coverage it easily takes that much or more yes.
Le jeu. 21 juin 2018 07:30, Gurkan Erdogdu a écrit :
> Romain, do you mean that each release running with TCK takes 13h?
>
> On Wed, Jun 20, 2018 at 9:33 AM, Romain Manni-Bucau >
> wrote:
&
>
> that's it.
>
> Everything else is not really user friendly and will make it harder for
> any new committer to get on board.
> I get the argument test coverage. But some of these examples still use the
> javaee6 apis, etc...
>
> LieGrue,
> strub
>
> > Am
For the story it was not done cause not deployed and not linked to the
projzct for most of them.
Also, as you noticed in another mail, the reactor (and build) was not
designed to use the plugin so maybz dont fight too much that way ;)
Le mar. 19 juin 2018 22:55, a écrit :
> move samples to the
Dropping the example will require to move their tests in the main chain
since they are part of our coverage.
Also note you probably dont want to use release plugin cause running the
test (with -Pall-adapters if you respect the plugin philosophy) is quite
long (should be ~3h x2). Just tag and deplo
FYI we already have these files in src/test/resources ;)
-- Forwarded message -
From:
Date: mar. 19 juin 2018 21:12
Subject: [2/2] tomee git commit: add testng runner files for tests which
are under development.
To:
add testng runner files for tests which are under development.
test that scale change but don't change the ratio please.
Romain Manni-Bucau
@rmannibucau <https://twitter.com/rmannibucau> | Blog
<https://rmannibucau.metawerx.net/> | Old Blog
<http://rmannibucau.wordpress.com> | Github <https://github.com/rmannibucau> |
LinkedIn
see TOMEE-2139 currently broken due to #f24c42e2212c575
> We cannot release with this test.
>
> LieGrue,
> strub
>
>
> > Am 17.06.2018 um 14:03 schrieb Romain Manni-Bucau >:
> >
> > Can need a clean to pass IIRC. Code is unrelated to tomcat actually
> >
>
>>
> >>>>>>>>>
> >>>>>>>>> The rest seems to work fine.
> >>>>>>>>> So I gonna push forward with the Johnzon-1.0.1 release
> >>>>>>>>>
&
;>> :
> >>>>>>>>
> >>>>>>>> Yes, working on it.
> >>>>>>>>
> >>>>>>>> But I only see 2 bugs reported for this release.
> >>>>>>>>
> >>>>>>
Hi, your SPI file is wrong:
META-INF/org.apache.openejb.cipher.PasswordCipher/reverse
see
https://github.com/apache/tomee/blob/master/container/openejb-core/src/test/resources/META-INF/org.apache.openejb.cipher.PasswordCipher/reverse
for example
Romain Manni-Bucau
@rmannibucau <ht
Hmm, if that's a regression due to openejb.scan.webapp.container change we
should fix it otherwise we'll break a lot of users.
Romain Manni-Bucau
@rmannibucau <https://twitter.com/rmannibucau> | Blog
<https://rmannibucau.metawerx.net/> | Old Blog
<http://rmannibuca
What is suspicious is that:
1. was working well for years
2. it is already isolated in tomee since we scan the deployable and not the
classpath for that reason
maybe the default scanning of the container change?
Romain Manni-Bucau
@rmannibucau <https://twitter.com/rmannibucau> | Blog
Can be a classloader change with a recent upgrade.
Le sam. 9 juin 2018 13:23, Mark Struberg a
écrit :
>
> I get a duplicate unit exception in
> jug.rest.arquillian.SubjectServiceTomEETest which is in polling-web.This
> happens in the fb_tomee8 branch.
>
> 0 = {TreeMap$Entry@5654}
> "file:/home/s
if jackson changed something about its lifecycle@classloader usage then it
can lead to that if part of the app overlapp between the lib part of the
ear and the webapps. In TomEE the webapp tries to load from the parent
first.
Romain Manni-Bucau
@rmannibucau <https://twitter.com/rmannibu
Hi Dignesh,
can you check 7.0.5 out before digging further?
Also do you deploy an ear or war? If an ear maybe ensure there is no
jackson in the webapps.
Romain Manni-Bucau
@rmannibucau <https://twitter.com/rmannibucau> | Blog
<https://rmannibucau.metawerx.net/> | Ol
Hi
Maybe start in debug mode but superbiz is clearly not hardcoded and we have
tests and users relying on a lot of different names.
Le sam. 26 mai 2018 14:43, sudhakarvm a écrit :
> I have simple JAX-RS service invoking an annotation based EJB. But my TomEE
> 7.0.3 never recognizes this EJB if
https://gitbox.apache.org/repos/asf/commons-weaver.git ;)
Romain Manni-Bucau
@rmannibucau <https://twitter.com/rmannibucau> | Blog
<https://rmannibucau.metawerx.net/> | Old Blog
<http://rmannibucau.wordpress.com> | Github <https://github.com/rmannibucau> |
LinkedIn <
We are on git: https://git-wip-us.apache.org/repos/asf/bval.git
Romain Manni-Bucau
@rmannibucau <https://twitter.com/rmannibucau> | Blog
<https://rmannibucau.metawerx.net/> | Old Blog
<http://rmannibucau.wordpress.com> | Github <https://github.com/rmannibuc
RS ........ FAILURE
> [02:17 min]
>
>
>
> On 16/05/18 23:15, Romain Manni-Bucau wrote:
> > fixed (the message issue, the underlying bval@getter issue + the cxf
> > validation issue), you need bval (bval2 branch) snapshot and tomee
> > fb_tomee8 branc
Hi
Add a conf/exclusions.list file with this content (assuming tibco- is a
common prefix of tibco jars):
default-list
tibco-
Le jeu. 17 mai 2018 02:41, Lakshmikanth W a écrit :
> Are there any particular settings to integrate tibco with tomee plus?
> I am seeing below error while tomee startin
fixed (the message issue, the underlying bval@getter issue + the cxf
validation issue), you need bval (bval2 branch) snapshot and tomee
fb_tomee8 branch snapshot to get it
Romain Manni-Bucau
@rmannibucau <https://twitter.com/rmannibucau> | Blog
<https://rmannibucau.metawerx.net/>
seems due to our exclusion changes, will try to fix it now
Romain Manni-Bucau
@rmannibucau <https://twitter.com/rmannibucau> | Blog
<https://rmannibucau.metawerx.net/> | Old Blog
<http://rmannibucau.wordpress.com> | Github <https://github.com/rmannibucau> |
LinkedIn <
That was the trick with link(), if you have the child in classloader C and
the parent in C.parent then you get the parent included. This is why i
think something can have been broken.
Romain Manni-Bucau
@rmannibucau <https://twitter.com/rmannibucau> | Blog
<https://rmannibucau.met
Mark
Previous test issue can be due to xbean upgrades or scanning changes, did
you check that? We tend to link implicitly the finder for these tests but
can have been broken at some point.
Le mar. 15 mai 2018 23:16, Mark Struberg a
écrit :
> fb_tomee8
> I've fixed this now by fixing the broken
It is in since yesterday
Le 5 mai 2018 15:53, "Matthew Broadhead" a
écrit :
> i saw MyFaces 2.3.1 was released. will that get update in 8.0?
>
>
> On 05/05/18 14:18, Romain Manni-Bucau wrote:
>
>> We didnt upgrade the api yet and still uses validatio
We didnt upgrade the api yet and still uses validation 1.1
Le 5 mai 2018 13:03, "cocorossello" a écrit :
> Hi,
>
> I just noticed that javax.validation.ClockProvider and some methods related
> to bean validation api 2.0 are missing in javaee-api-8.0-SNAPSHOT (I'm
> using it with hibernate-valid
guess we can just use the master release note since the last release and
drop the spec N+1 items no?
+1 to get it merged (I'd appreciate if Mark can give a shot before since it
is a big one but looked ok and well working on my side)
Romain Manni-Bucau
@rmannibucau <https://twi
http://tomee.apache.org/community/sources.html
side note: github is just a proxy for us until we migrate to gitbox which
is ~basically an asf repo on github.
Romain Manni-Bucau
@rmannibucau <https://twitter.com/rmannibucau> | Blog
<https://rmannibucau.metawerx.net/> | Ol
pr 4, 2018 at 1:06 PM, Mark Struberg
>>>>>
>>>> >>
>>>> wrote:
>>>>>
>>>>> As noted elsewhere: the vote question was a mixture of 'what do you
>>>>>> think' (consensus -> majority vote) and 'is it ok'
quot;. First
answer is clearly "no impact" - we are already in prod with j8 - and last
one is pretty much the same technically AFAIK.
Romain Manni-Bucau
@rmannibucau <https://twitter.com/rmannibucau> | Blog
<https://rmannibucau.metawerx.net/> | Old Blog
<http://r
move forward.
--
David Blevins
http://twitter.com/dblevins
http://www.tomitribe.com
> On May 1, 2018, at 1:04 PM, Romain Manni-Bucau
wrote:
>
> Which leads to the same David, no?
> There is no decision taken and no real argument - before your mail - for a
> 7.1.
> Either there ar
mEE 8
--
David Blevins
http://twitter.com/dblevins
http://www.tomitribe.com
> On Apr 30, 2018, at 7:55 AM, Romain Manni-Bucau
wrote:
>
> Hmm, can have missed something but didnt the outcome of the thread have
> been to work in tomee 8 branch (always better to avoid merges ;))?
>
Hmm, can have missed something but didnt the outcome of the thread have
been to work in tomee 8 branch (always better to avoid merges ;))?
Romain Manni-Bucau
@rmannibucau <https://twitter.com/rmannibucau> | Blog
<https://rmannibucau.metawerx.net/> | Old Blog
<http://rmannibuca
+1
Romain Manni-Bucau
@rmannibucau <https://twitter.com/rmannibucau> | Blog
<https://rmannibucau.metawerx.net/> | Old Blog
<http://rmannibucau.wordpress.com> | Github <https://github.com/rmannibucau> |
LinkedIn <https://www.linkedin.com/in/rmannibucau> |
"The swiss knife server"?
We should probably avoid "enterprise tomcat" since it means something else
in the industry - but we can say "enterprised server" if we want to play on
words :).
You are right, speaking of embedded/remote/standalone doesnt make much
sense here.
Le 27 avr. 2018 23:02, "Da
We are working with Mark on a release train soon, johnzon would be part of
it probably.
An OWB release is needed too AFAIK and is on its way.
Romain Manni-Bucau
@rmannibucau <https://twitter.com/rmannibucau> | Blog
<https://rmannibucau.metawerx.net/> | Old Blog
<http://rmannibuca
+1
Romain Manni-Bucau
@rmannibucau <https://twitter.com/rmannibucau> | Blog
<https://rmannibucau.metawerx.net/> | Old Blog
<http://rmannibucau.wordpress.com> | Github <https://github.com/rmannibucau> |
LinkedIn <https://www.linkedin.com/in/rmannibucau> |
Hi Dignesh
Normally if you dont have a local (or local bean) interface we
automatically do a "classloader copy" which means if the same api classes
are in both ears it should work.
Le 23 avr. 2018 06:44, "Dignesh" a écrit :
Hi,
I am using 7.0.2 TomEE. I have 2 ears (A.ear and B.ear) .As both
ou want, most
important is to fix 1.
Romain Manni-Bucau
@rmannibucau <https://twitter.com/rmannibucau> | Blog
<https://rmannibucau.metawerx.net/> | Old Blog
<http://rmannibucau.wordpress.com> | Github <https://github.com/rmannibucau> |
LinkedIn <https://www.linkedin.co
Le 19 avr. 2018 20:47, "Mark Struberg" a écrit :
Heh that was nicely put and I do certainly agree with your finding ;)
@Romain, the 7.1 was just 7.0.x + java8 bump and MP.
I got that but not its need.
Of course I have no clue who will use EE7 with MP, if he can have EE8 as
well...
All I want
+1 for a next week release, no need of M1 or whatever marker in the name,
just 8.0.0 is fine IMHO.
Romain Manni-Bucau
@rmannibucau <https://twitter.com/rmannibucau> | Blog
<https://rmannibucau.metawerx.net/> | Old Blog
<http://rmannibucau.wordpress.com> | Github <https://g
Hmm,
I don't get the rational of having a 7.x with that. Any reason?
Technically TomEE 8 is way more ready to release than TomEE 7.1 ;).
Romain Manni-Bucau
@rmannibucau <https://twitter.com/rmannibucau> | Blog
<https://rmannibucau.metawerx.net/> | Old Blog
<http://rmann
it :
> On Apr 17, 2018, at 9:57 PM, Romain Manni-Bucau
wrote:
>
> What is blocking to release tomee 8? Nothing ;)
Moving this over as it's probably a good "top level" topic to discuss.
This will probably come to do "do we care about certification anymore" and
th
What is blocking to release tomee 8? Nothing ;)
Id keep it simple and avoid another maintenance branch.
Le 17 avr. 2018 23:49, "Jonathan Gallimore"
a écrit :
> On Tue, 17 Apr 2018, 22:32 David Blevins, wrote:
>
> > > On Apr 17, 2018, at 2:26 PM, Jean-Louis Monteiro <
> > jlmonte...@tomitribe.c
Isnt it fb_tomee8 branch so tomee 8?
Otherwise +1
Le 17 avr. 2018 01:11, "Jean-Louis Monteiro" a
écrit :
> Hi community,
>
> Most microprofile requires Java 8.
> Is everyone ok if we have microprofile implemented on TomEE 7.1 (Java 8)?
>
> Thanks
>
>
> --
> Jean-Louis Monteiro
> http://twitter.
It is the fix, originally alternative=true was a very secured impl cause
even with a poorly setup test it was passing but it was wrong. Maybe it is
worth a ticket to have it in the changelog but no doubt we are good now.
Le 16 avr. 2018 07:41, "Mark Struberg" a écrit :
> Hi jon!
>
> Most probabl
pr 1, 2018 at 6:04 PM, Jonathan Gallimore <
> jonathan.gallim...@gmail.com> wrote:
>
> > Happy to try that. I'll give that a go this evening. I misunderstood your
> > proposal, but it makes sense now.
> >
> > Cheers
> >
> > Jo
> >
> >
pr 1, 2018 at 6:04 PM, Jonathan Gallimore <
> jonathan.gallim...@gmail.com> wrote:
>
> > Happy to try that. I'll give that a go this evening. I misunderstood your
> > proposal, but it makes sense now.
> >
> > Cheers
> >
> > Jo
> >
> >
I can probably deploy openjpa snapshot on monday if still needed but not
this week end.
Le 15 avr. 2018 07:16, "Alex The Rocker" a écrit :
> Hello Jon,
>
> Sounds like very good news!
> I'm ready to run our real-life tests with any preview of Johnzon 1.0.1
> if it's compatible with current TomEE
Le 12 avr. 2018 23:24, "gilbertoca" a écrit :
Guys, just a user here.
>From my experience, no one knows the Geronimo project[1] (for me it appears
a retired/dead one).
Everyone I talk with thinks everything is in TomEE (I thought like this
before).
Now, after read about the project in the mail-l
why -> for consistency accross our coupled communities
why does it matter if it is in G for T? -> it doesn't
Romain Manni-Bucau
@rmannibucau | Blog | Old Blog | Github | LinkedIn | Book
2018-04-12 15:56 GMT+02:00 Matthew Broadhead :
> we already include libraries from geronimo,
it I would like to avoid to have to maintain 2
versions of the "same" code, it already proved being a failure promise
multiple times so it is more a management reason than a technical one
since the spec is pretty trivial.
Romain Manni-Bucau
@rmannibucau | Blog | Old Blog | Github | Linke
ode is maintained at Geronimo, that TomEE code only
> contains the integration parts. But it will not be a complete
> implementation of MP JWT Auth (The Geronimo project).
>
> Rudy
>
> On 10 April 2018 at 06:58, Romain Manni-Bucau wrote:
>
>> Le 10 avr. 2018 05:23, "D
o
Jonathan Gallimore
Thiago Veronezi
+0
Rudy De Busscher
-1s
Mark Struberg
Romain Manni-Bucau
This was intended as a non-technical vote, so I've registered Mark's -1 as
he intended it. Thanks, Mark, for the clarification. Matthew, you didn't
vote, your participation was quite high -
Without the code it is hard to guess bit the exception mapping is not
correct it seems. Does TestException match the wsdl? Is it a generated wsdl?
Le 6 avr. 2018 08:18, "Dignesh" a écrit :
Hi,
I am getting regular warning messages in the catalina log file,when i start
the tomee and access the w
What about my proposal? Take johnzon master, copy it over 1.0.x and
downgrade apis? It is probably the safest and shouldnt be long to make
work. Can help next week if needed.
Le 1 avr. 2018 17:06, "Jonathan Gallimore" a
écrit :
> Agreed. I'll start working on the list of fixes tonight.
>
> Jon
>
herever it comes from - but i
think i see where/how it comes from.
Fair enough, let just get tomee 8 out then and reject that good bad idea ;).
LieGrue,strub
On Sunday, 1 April 2018, 16:13:00 CEST, Romain Manni-Bucau <
rmannibu...@gmail.com> wrote:
Le 1 avr. 2018 12:13, "Ma
ay, 1 April 2018, 08:59:03 CEST, Romain Manni-Bucau <
rmannibu...@gmail.com> wrote:
Le 1 avr. 2018 07:47, "Alex The Rocker" a écrit :
Hello Mark,
The point is not to enable EE8 features in TomEE 7.0.5.
Is is about fixing the many issues of currently available TomEE 7.0.4
in its J
i easier?
LieGrue,strub
On Sunday, 1 April 2018, 08:59:03 CEST, Romain Manni-Bucau <
rmannibu...@gmail.com> wrote:
Le 1 avr. 2018 07:47, "Alex The Rocker" a écrit :
Hello Mark,
The point is not to enable EE8 features in TomEE 7.0.5.
Is is about fixing the many issues of curr
start adding EE8 features then we will further blur the line.Imo we
should remain clean and push for TomEE8 instead...
> LieGrue,strub
>
>
> On Saturday, 31 March 2018, 23:00:43 CEST, Romain Manni-Bucau <
rmannibu...@gmail.com> wrote:
>
> Le 31 mars 2018 22:33, "Mar
e
explicit.
New title of this JIRA is now "Dependency upgrade to Johnzon 1.1.7"
Could this be part of next 7.0.5-snapshot ?
Best regards,
Alexandre
2018-03-31 18:12 GMT+02:00 Romain Manni-Bucau :
> Le 31 mars 2018 16:36, "Alex The Rocker" a écrit :
>
> Hi Romain,
es committed so far.
+1 from me too
After all ,Java 7 end of public updates was in April 2015, so making
Java 8 as the minimum prerequisite for TomEE7 three years later after
this date sounds very reasonable.
Thanks,
Alexandre
2018-03-31 15:44 GMT+02:00 Romain Manni-Bucau :
> Le 31 mars 201
loud.
Jon
On Sat, 31 Mar 2018, 12:29 Alex The Rocker, wrote:
> Hello,
>
> I agree with Romain : couldn't TomEE 7.0.5 be based on latest stable
> Johnzon 1.1.x ?
>
> Best regards,
> Alexandre
>
>
> 2018-03-31 11:16 GMT+02:00 Romain Manni-Bucau :
> > We
is is not
> > > the case:
> > > * The following JIRA is still opened :
> > > https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/TOMEE-2153
> > > * According to discussion in same thread of message, Romain proposed
> > > to push Johnzon 1.1.x in wha
> > &
Le 30 mars 2018 23:46, "David Blevins" a écrit :
> On Mar 29, 2018, at 10:06 PM, Romain Manni-Bucau
wrote:
>
> Le 30 mars 2018 04:30, "David Blevins" a écrit :
>
>
>> On Mar 29, 2018, at 12:57 PM, David Blevins
> wrote:
>>
>>>
2018-03-30 7:24 GMT+02:00 Jonathan Gallimore :
> On Fri, 30 Mar 2018, 06:06 Romain Manni-Bucau,
> wrote:
>
> > Le 30 mars 2018 04:30, "David Blevins" a
> écrit :
> >
> >
> > > On Mar 29, 2018, at 12:57 PM, David Blevins
> > wrote:
> &
Le 30 mars 2018 04:30, "David Blevins" a écrit :
> On Mar 29, 2018, at 12:57 PM, David Blevins
wrote:
>
>> On Mar 29, 2018, at 12:15 PM, Romain Manni-Bucau
wrote:
>>
>> Le 29 mars 2018 20:49, "David Blevins" a écrit
:
>>
>>
>&
quot; being unite as
we have been 7 years ago instead of just going on different paths cause of
a fears.
Le 29 mars 2018 21:57, "David Blevins" a écrit :
> On Mar 29, 2018, at 12:15 PM, Romain Manni-Bucau
wrote:
>
> Le 29 mars 2018 20:49, "David Blevins" a écrit :
Le 29 mars 2018 20:49, "David Blevins" a écrit :
> On Mar 28, 2018, at 8:53 PM, Romain Manni-Bucau
wrote:
>
> > On Mar 28, 2018, at 6:29 PM, David Blevins
wrote:
> > Is your -1 on the basis that the code must be moved to Geronimo?
>
> That + the fact tomee i
e Rocker
wrote:
> Hello,
>
> I noticed that in latest TomEE 7.0.5 SNAPSHOT we will have Johnzon 1.0.0.
> Is there any chance to see Romain's proposal to ise jsonp/b 1.1/1.0 in
> tomee 7 come out anytime soon?
>
> Best regards,
> Alexandre
>
>
> 2018-03-04 14:46 GM
signature (and optionally the date validation range).
Romain Manni-Bucau
@rmannibucau <https://twitter.com/rmannibucau> | Blog
<https://rmannibucau.metawerx.net/> | Old Blog
<http://rmannibucau.wordpress.com> | Github <https://github.com/rmannibucau> |
LinkedIn <
Le 29 mars 2018 03:29, "David Blevins" a écrit :
> On Mar 28, 2018, at 1:21 AM, Romain Manni-Bucau
wrote:
>
> Just move the "main" code to the repo created @G and import the new lib in
> tomee MP as Roberto did for config. Nothing blocking JL to do them at
@Jon: drop some SE style code to move to CDI style and allow apps to
override "naturally" impls + droppring jose dep are the main ones. Some
optim in the Bean impl should pby be planned too but can need some more
investment and are less blocking for a 1.0.0.
Romain Manni-Bucau
@r
xml you can put "MP-JWT" to ensure the JWT
are validated and propagated to the request. (= validation side, not
emittion)
>
>
> On 28/03/2018 10:15, Romain Manni-Bucau wrote:
>
>> Hi Matthew,
>>
>> it is an impl of https://github.com/eclipse/microprofile-jwt-
2018-03-28 10:17 GMT+02:00 Jonathan Gallimore
:
> On Wed, Mar 28, 2018 at 6:13 AM, Romain Manni-Bucau >
> wrote:
>
> > Roberto PR *is* merged JL.
> > He did the work to be able to consume any CDI "container" lib.
> >
> > So I'd just extract
Hi Matthew,
it is an impl of https://github.com/eclipse/microprofile-jwt-auth
Normally with a JWT you can drop these things as well - can need some
wrapper to handle the representation in a less raw way but nothing crazy.
Romain Manni-Bucau
@rmannibucau <https://twitter.com/rmannibu
matthew.broadh...@nbmlaw.co.uk> wrote:
> >
> > > does this mean a reusable JWT library external to TomEE, or within the
> > > TomEE project?
> > > i have to agree with previous statements i read that TomEE is a bundle
> of
> > > libraries and not really th
; I've tried to answer the 2 VOTE threads.
> >
> > Another option is to merge and immediately extract the code into a
> sandbox
> > project so everyone can clearly see what is reusable or not.
> > Would that help?
> >
> >
> > --
> > Jean-Lou
You can, probably just use "Logo Contest" thread as the way to do it.
Romain Manni-Bucau
@rmannibucau <https://twitter.com/rmannibucau> | Blog
<https://rmannibucau.metawerx.net/> | Old Blog
<http://rmannibucau.wordpress.com> | Github <https://github.com
Hi Felipe, your issue is not linked to tomee I think
Romain Manni-Bucau
@rmannibucau <https://twitter.com/rmannibucau> | Blog
<https://rmannibucau.metawerx.net/> | Old Blog
<http://rmannibucau.wordpress.com> | Github <https://github.com/rmannibucau> |
LinkedIn <
l contribution.
>
Guessed so when I saw the twitter thread ;)
>
> On Mon, Mar 26, 2018 at 3:15 PM Romain Manni-Bucau
> wrote:
>
> > Le 26 mars 2018 21:11, "Richard Monson-Haefel" a
> > écrit :
> >
> > I can do that, but I wanted to just get so
bout that or is there some other reason. Thanks!
Some care(d) but gave up after months of discussion with a single logo
proposal and an aborted contest with 27 cool logos.
On Sun, Mar 25, 2018 at 10:00 AM, Romain Manni-Bucau
wrote:
> Hi Richard,
>
> You can add one on https://issue
don't see them in your
> email.
>
maybe attach it to jira, generally half of the clients don't get the
attached files :(
>
> On Sun, Mar 25, 2018 at 12:00 PM, Romain Manni-Bucau <
> rmannibu...@gmail.com>
> wrote:
>
> > Hi Richard,
> >
> >
Hi Richard,
You can add one on https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/TOMEE-574 but the
contest is actually dead and there is no discussion to change the logo ATM
so don't get too much hope.
Romain Manni-Bucau
@rmannibucau <https://twitter.com/rmannibucau> |
This approach is fine and where I disagree - but as you said one of the
beauty of asf is to be allowed to "disagree" - and dislike it a lot is that
it is a tomee central vision instead of considering asf as the central
point.
To try to illustrate it I'll take a car example: you can optimise the
th
Used most to be explicit and my meaning but your wording is more correct.
Le 19 mars 2018 22:46, "Mark Struberg" a écrit :
> heh yea, just keep it going. But keep the idea of probably having
> something tomee independent in the back of your head please!
> It's not that we need to go through inc
Jwt-auth impl doesnt depend on tomee and is reusable so must not be put in
tomee codebase.
Hope it is clearer this time.
Le 19 mars 2018 18:54, "John D. Ament" a écrit :
> On Mon, Mar 19, 2018 at 3:20 AM Romain Manni-Bucau
> wrote:
>
> > 2018-03-19 0:0
ought - can be wrong - it was using svn which is now highly not
encouraged but anyway if we can make it it would ease the usage (but can be
done after a few releases).
>
> Cheers
>
> Jon
>
> On Mon, Mar 19, 2018 at 12:26 PM, Romain Manni-Bucau <
> rmannibu...@gmail.com>
> wro
+1
Side questions:
1. did we already try contributing to wtp?
2. How to expose an update site at asf?
Le 19 mars 2018 13:19, "Jonathan Gallimore"
a écrit :
> Hi
>
> As discussed here:
> http://tomee-openejb.979440.n4.nabble.com/MP-JWT-progress-
> tp4683480p4683612.html
>
> I'd like migrate our
. The first choice for anything should be TomEE,
> >> as that is the community we serve. The first response should be thank
> >> you, and we should accept the help offered. Then those that want to
> >> worry about extraction and reuse should feel free to go ahead and do
e should be thank
>> you, and we should accept the help offered. Then those that want to
>> worry about extraction and reuse should feel free to go ahead and do
>> that if they feel strongly enough about it. It should not be the
>> priority for TomEE.
>>
>> The goal s
enwebbeans, batchee, johnzon, ...)
This allows to use the projects in any CDI based application without having
the drawback of being tomee dependent which is not required by any MP spec.
>
> Andy.
>
>
>
> On 19/03/18 01:02, David Blevins wrote:
>
>> On Mar 18, 2018, at 2:38
2018-03-19 0:07 GMT+01:00 John D. Ament :
>
>
> On Sun, Mar 18, 2018 at 5:38 PM Romain Manni-Bucau
> wrote:
>
>>
>>
>> Le 18 mars 2018 21:29, "David Blevins" a
>> écrit :
>>
>>
>> > On Mar 18, 2018, at 12:43 PM, Romain M
-1 - even against this vote to be honest, you started 2 votes to decide
what we do about that code, we discussed it and stated it was an awesome
start but needing cleanup to be integrable and releasable, so why another
3rd vote to urge things and get code preventing a release merged?
Le 19 mars 2
201 - 300 of 2257 matches
Mail list logo
